Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in intestinal failure (IF) patients after different modes of intestinal rehabilitation. Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the generic 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36, ver. 2) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in 6 different areas: diet, sleep, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, diarrhea, musculoskeletal pain, and other symptoms. Results: Twenty-two patients completed the questionnaires, of which 7 had received intestinal transplant (ITx), 9 were continuing home total parenteral nutrition (HPN), and 6 had tapered off total parenteral nutrition (TPN). SF-36 physical component summary scores were highest in the ITx group (median, 65.6; interquartile range [IQR], 31.6–80.3) compared to the HPN (median, 48.4; IQR, 44.7–66.3) or tapered group (median, 54.2; IQR, 45.2–61.6). Mental component summary scores were lowest in the ITx group (median, 48.8; IQR, 37.1–63.6), compared to the TPN (median, 60.2; IQR, 41.6–78.5) or tapered group (median, 51.0; IQR, 48.8–56.0). Differences were not significant in all items of the SF-36. VAS scores showed that patients in the ITx group showed the best results in diet (0.9), gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (1.4), and musculoskeletal pain (2.4). There was a significant difference in sleep (P = 0.036), with the ITx (1.43) and HPN groups (1.33) showing better outcomes compared with the tapered group (4.67). Patients in the tapered group showed the least favorable results in all performance areas, except GI symptoms. Conclusion SF-36 did not show a significant difference between the ITx, HPN, and tapered groups, but VAS showed a significant difference in sleep between groups. Further studies, including serial data, will allow a better understanding of the effects of different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in intestinal failure (IF) patients after different modes of intestinal rehabilitation. Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the generic 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36, ver. 2) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in 6 different areas: diet, sleep, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, diarrhea, musculoskeletal pain, and other symptoms. Results: Twenty-two patients completed the questionnaires, of which 7 had received intestinal transplant (ITx), 9 were continuing home total parenteral nutrition (HPN), and 6 had tapered off total parenteral nutrition (TPN). SF-36 physical component summary scores were highest in the ITx group (median, 65.6; interquartile range [IQR], 31.6–80.3) compared to the HPN (median, 48.4; IQR, 44.7–66.3) or tapered group (median, 54.2; IQR, 45.2–61.6). Mental component summary scores were lowest in the ITx group (median, 48.8; IQR, 37.1–63.6), compared to the TPN (median, 60.2; IQR, 41.6–78.5) or tapered group (median, 51.0; IQR, 48.8–56.0). Differences were not significant in all items of the SF-36. VAS scores showed that patients in the ITx group showed the best results in diet (0.9), gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (1.4), and musculoskeletal pain (2.4). There was a significant difference in sleep (P = 0.036), with the ITx (1.43) and HPN groups (1.33) showing better outcomes compared with the tapered group (4.67). Patients in the tapered group showed the least favorable results in all performance areas, except GI symptoms. Conclusion SF-36 did not show a significant difference between the ITx, HPN, and tapered groups, but VAS showed a significant difference in sleep between groups. Further studies, including serial data, will allow a better understanding of the effects of different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in intestinal failure (IF) patients after different modes of intestinal rehabilitation. Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the generic 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36, ver. 2) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in 6 different areas: diet, sleep, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, diarrhea, musculoskeletal pain, and other symptoms. Results: Twenty-two patients completed the questionnaires, of which 7 had received intestinal transplant (ITx), 9 were continuing home total parenteral nutrition (HPN), and 6 had tapered off total parenteral nutrition (TPN). SF-36 physical component summary scores were highest in the ITx group (median, 65.6; interquartile range [IQR], 31.6–80.3) compared to the HPN (median, 48.4; IQR, 44.7–66.3) or tapered group (median, 54.2; IQR, 45.2–61.6). Mental component summary scores were lowest in the ITx group (median, 48.8; IQR, 37.1–63.6), compared to the TPN (median, 60.2; IQR, 41.6–78.5) or tapered group (median, 51.0; IQR, 48.8–56.0). Differences were not significant in all items of the SF-36. VAS scores showed that patients in the ITx group showed the best results in diet (0.9), gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (1.4), and musculoskeletal pain (2.4). There was a significant difference in sleep (P = 0.036), with the ITx (1.43) and HPN groups (1.33) showing better outcomes compared with the tapered group (4.67). Patients in the tapered group showed the least favorable results in all performance areas, except GI symptoms. Conclusion SF-36 did not show a significant difference between the ITx, HPN, and tapered groups, but VAS showed a significant difference in sleep between groups. Further studies, including serial data, will allow a better understanding of the effects of different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been used for over a century and has been demonstrated to be effective in treating patients with various allergic diseases. AIT allergens can be administered through various routes, including subcutaneous, sublingual, intralymphatic, oral, or epicutaneous routes. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has recently gained clinical interest, and it is considered an alternative treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma. This review provides an overview of the current evidence-based studies that address the use of SLIT for treating AR, including (1) mechanisms of action, (2) appropriate patient selection for SLIT, (3) the current available SLIT products in Korea, and (4) updated information on its efficacy and safety. Finally, this guideline aims to provide the clinician with practical considerations for SLIT.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a causative treatment of allergic diseases in which allergen extracts are regularly administered in a gradually escalated doses, leading to immune tolerance and consequent alleviation of allergic diseases. The need for uniform practice guidelines in AIT is continuously growing as the number of potential candidates for AIT increases and new therapeutic approaches are tried. This updated version of the Korean Academy of Asthma Allergy and Clinical Immunology recommendations for AIT, published in 2010, proposes an expert opinion by specialists in allergy, pediatrics, and otorhinolaryngology. This guideline deals with the basic knowledge of AIT, including mechanisms, clinical efficacy, allergen standardization, important allergens in Korea, and special consideration in pediatrics. The article also covers the methodological aspects of AIT, including patient selection, allergen selection, schedule and doses, follow-up care, efficacy measurements, and management of adverse reactions. Although this guideline suggests the optimal dosing schedule, an individualized approach and modifications are recommended considering the situation for each patient and clinic.